In the Coalition Avenir Québec’s original program, the word “deputy” appears only once.
Can we really be surprised that a former MP, Émilie Foster, deplores the fact that backbench MPs feel “crushed” by the party line?
The strength of parliamentary democracy has never been one of François Legault’s priorities. It was known and assumed.
However, the problem is real. Members who are neither minister nor whip or leader have very few powers. In a caucus of 90, it is not negligible.
François Legault argues that they have the necessary freedom of speech behind closed caucus doors. Others will talk about their role in the study of bills, or their work in the constituency.
Certainly, it is not negligible.
But in reality, backbench MPs too often serve as stooges for their party. Machines to vote, to pass the pill of difficult decisions and to praise the successes.
However, MPs should not remain prisoners of a system that suffocates and devalues them. They have the power to change things. Too often they don’t because they’re entertaining the dream of eventual promotion.
- Listen to the Latraverse-Dumont meeting with Emmanuelle Latraverse at the microphone of Mario Dumont via QUB-radio :
Performers
Whatever the CAQ says, it’s not the salary that makes recruitment difficult in politics, it’s much more this straitjacket.
We can blame the party line. She is often too strict.
One can deplore the power of unelected political advisers. The distortion is real.
We can also point the finger at the media which highlight any dissension. It contributes to cynicism in politics.
But MPs do not have the luxury of sparing themselves an examination of conscience. Didn’t they promise their constituents that they would represent their interests in government? Too often they do the opposite. Represent their government to voters.
Everybody knows it.
- Listen to the Latraverse-Dumont meeting with Emmanuelle Latraverse at the microphone of Mario Dumont via QUB-radio :
Solutions
Objectively, dissent should be allowed.
I am not talking here about the existential crises that lead to a questioning of the leader’s leadership, as the PQ has too often accustomed us to.
I’m talking about the right to disagree. The right to claim more freedom.
The federal scene is full of examples of deputies who have dared. Joel Lightbound, Nathaniel Erskine-Smith, Michael Chong and so on.
They are no worse off. They did not tear up their caucus. Above all, they have earned the respect of their constituents.
Nothing prevents the caquistes to carry out such a reflection in Quebec. The government will not fall. A Prime Minister who knows how to navigate his caucus must let go from time to time.
Moreover, the right of dissidence exceptionally allowed during the retreat on the third link is proof of this.
Above all, François Legault could draw inspiration from Stephen Harper.
He had set up an advisory committee of ministers to the caucus. No initiative could be presented to the cabinet without having first obtained the green light from the deputies.
Cleverly, he thus gave meaning to the work of his backbenchers. They had a real voice in the chapter.
Like what reforms are possible. You just have to have the courage to claim them.